Chamber and committees

Okay. Thanks. That is helpful. Does Graham Simpson want to come in on that point?

Just going back to the equality and fairer Scotland duty, I am looking at the Government’s statement, which was authorised in March 2021, so it has been in place for more than two years. When I read the statement, I wondered how those assessments will be made. It says that plans will have to be

“fully Equality & Fairer Scotland Impact Assessed”.

How is the Government doing that? Have you seen any evidence that it has been doing it at all?

Our main item this morning is agenda item 2, which is consideration of the Auditor General for Scotland’s briefing paper, “Investing in Scotland’s infrastructure”, which was published at the end of September. I am pleased to welcome the Auditor General, Stephen Boyle, who is joined by Ashleigh Madjitey and Dharshi Santhakumaran, from Audit Scotland. Ashleigh is an audit manager and Dharshi is a senior audit manager.

Before we get into the questions, I ask the Auditor General to make a short opening statement.

So those are not projects with work under way on the ground or on which construction has commenced. They are in a pipeline, and that will include sign-off of the business case.

I know that Willie Coffey also wants to come in on this point. I note that the briefing paper talks about the Scottish Futures Trust’s role in advising the Government in advance of difficult decisions on the prioritisation of projects. Its advice, therefore, is not just on the contractual terms that might be negotiated around a PFI, public-private partnership or whatever arrangement coming to an end; it also offers the Government an advisory role in establishing what is called in paragraph 10 of the briefing “a prioritisation framework”. Can you elaborate on that? We have talked about prioritisation being necessary, funding being challenging and difficult decisions having to be made, but do we know how the Government will make those decisions? Have we seen that framework, for example?

Can you clarify that, in all cases, the consideration is absorption into the public sector, and that the Scottish Futures Trust is not advising the Government on other options such as extending the PFI deal or bringing in a different contractor. I realise that a lot of the contracts were build as well as operate, but I wonder whether that is also a consideration.

My final question perhaps picks up some of that. In the briefing paper, you state:

“Strong leadership is needed ... to deliver the reform ambitions.”

That certainly echoes what the committee in session 5 felt was a recurring theme: the absence of strong leadership, or perhaps the importance of strong leadership in driving through some of these improvements and reforms. What is your sense of where we are with that? Have you seen much evidence of that?

That is very helpful. You are raising questions that we probably need to put directly to the Government. I have a quick question before I bring Willie Coffey then Graham Simpson back in. You have mentioned a couple of times the national treatment centres and the role that it was hoped they would fulfil. However, it is recorded in the report that the cost of the programme has more than doubled, while the delivery of the programme is at least three years late and counting. Does that suggest that the national treatment centre programme will be, or needs to be, scaled back?

That is a very fair point. Willie Coffey wants to come in on revenue-financed projects.

Colin Beattie has a very short question in this area.